Построение модели оценки потенциала инновационного проекта и ее оценки на основе гибридных экспертных систем
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<b>Why was this program developed?:</b> There are a growing number of autistic students attending college. However, the percentage of autistic students who complete their degree is quite low. We believe that colleges should be offering more support services to address the unique needs of their autistic students.<b>What does the program do?:</b> The Autism Mentorship Initiative (AMI) matches incoming autistic undergraduates with upper-level (third or fourth year) neurotypical undergraduates or graduate students who provide 1-on-1 mentorship. The autistic undergraduates meet regularly with their mentors to discuss personal and professional goals, discuss solutions for problems they are experiencing in college, and discuss ideas for increased integration into college campus life (e.g., joining clubs or attending social events). The neurotypical mentors receive ongoing training from program supervisors about autism and meet regularly with program supervisors to discuss progress with their mentees and troubleshoot issues they may be experiencing with their mentees.<b>How did the researchers evaluate the program?:</b> We evaluated AMI by administering the Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire at multiple time points to examine whether autistic mentees reported improvements in social, emotional, and academic adjustment to college as a result of participating in AMI. In addition to tracking changes in cumulative grade point average (GPA), we also administered program evaluation surveys to determine whether AMI is meeting its core aims and to assess satisfaction with the program from the perspectives of both mentors and mentees.<b>What are the early findings?:</b> While there were no changes in GPA, participation in AMI resulted in notable changes in mentees' academic, social, and emotional adjustment. Both mentors and mentees reported personal, academic, and professional benefits from their participation in AMI.<b>What were the weaknesses of this project?:</b> The sample size was small, so it is questionable whether the findings generalize to a broader autistic student population. In addition, there was no control group, so we cannot be certain that improvements in college adjustment were due to participation in AMI. Moreover, this study only assessed one program at one university in Western Canada, so it is unknown whether this program could be successfully implemented at other universities or in different geographic locations.<b>What are the next steps?:</b> As participation in AMI increases each year, follow-up studies will utilize larger sample sizes. We will seek to obtain control data by examining GPA and college adjustment in autistic students who do not participate in AMI. We will aim to conduct multisite trials to examine whether similar programs can be implemented at other universities.<b>How will this work help autistic adults now and in the future?:</b> We hope that our research will help faculty members and staff from disability support offices to gain ideas and insights in implementing similar-or better-programs at their respective institutions. Our experience is that mentorship programs can be both cost-effective and easily implemented, while offering an invaluable support system to autistic students that may increase the likelihood of degree completion.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.008 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it